Monday, February 11, 2013

Musing On Narjana

Musings on Westerhoffs treatment of Nagarjunas Logic
Marc H. Graham 13 May 2010
In chapter 4 of J. Westerhoffs book, Nagarjunas Madhyamaka, attributes the succeeding(a) claim to Nagarjuna: (1) For all x which come into cosmos depending on some event object, not (identical-with-a[x] or not identical-with-a[x]) Westerhoff asserts this should be understood as containing two, distinct concepts of negation. He illustrates the distinction as that between x is not a Brahmin and x is a non-Brahmin. The first of these statements does not entail that x is human, whereas the southward does. (Although both would seem to entail that x exists.) Westerhoff interprets (1) as [following his numbering] (4) It is denied that every the concept identical-with-a or its choice negation different-from-a can be ascribed to any object x which comes into being depending on some particular object [presumably a], without assuming that there is any partner off of a concept and its choice negation one of which can be applied to such an object. A choice negation, such as the apple is not yellow, implies the apple has some other color, whereas the alleged(prenominal) exclusion negation, seven is not yellow denies that seven has any color at all.

Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!

Westerhoff maintains the outer negation in (1) is exclusion and the interior is choice, which is his justification for re-writing (1) as (4). My objection to (4) is that the final, denied assumption is too strong. It is not any concept and its negation that be inapplicable; it is but identity. We can see this clearly if we become somewhat little abstract. An apple dependently-originates from a manoeuvre. There are innumerable concepts which are legitimately applied to the apple and the tree, which can be choice-negated: being edible and being woody for example. But consider the presumption of identity between the apple and the tree. The apple is certainly not the tree. Yet, the apple can not be distinguished from the tree: there is no part of the apple...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com



If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper

No comments:

Post a Comment